7sigma

16 ms·

121.
by 7sigma 10y ago
I think the way its done in biotechnology is that the company pays and some 3rd party lab (e.g. university) then does the experiment. There is also a positive bias from industry studies due to the fact that products tested internally that d
122.
by 7sigma 10y ago
Regarding gmos, thats not really true. While a lot of the research was done by industry (which is how its supposed to, why should the public pay for safety testing of products ?), there is also publicly funded research that confirms that GM
123.
Uncovering the brutal truth about the British empire(theguardian.com)
26 points by 7sigma 10y ago|1 comments
124.
by 7sigma 10y ago
Does anybody know the consequences of this regarding the search for dark matter? Specifically, dark matter particles?
125.
by 7sigma 10y ago
"The more food is altered, the less sure we become about that." Except with genetic engineering, by being precise as to how and where the new genes are inserted, we are actually altering it less than with traditional breeding or m
126.
by 7sigma 10y ago
what I meant is that we know what proteins the genes at that location will do. "We know nothing of the proliferation that gene may have in a wild population, or how our modification will help or hamper the organism to adapt to a changi
127.
by 7sigma 10y ago
You can never prove that any food is safe beyond a doubt. You can only say whether it riskier or not than other types of food or breeding. In the case of GMOs, it has been shown to be no less risky than conventional or mutagenic breeding. &
128.
by 7sigma 10y ago
thats why gmos are the most tested foods in history (despite what the naysaysers say) Mutagenic crops devised with stuff like cobalt 60 was never tested. Also you can breed a potato to be poisonous. In the end its a case by case basis Edit:
129.
by 7sigma 10y ago
google takeout my friend: https://takeout.google.com/settings/takeout
130.
BBC dismisses anti-GMO complaints on Panorama documentary on Bt brinjal project(marklynas.org)
1 points by 7sigma 10y ago|0 comments
131.
by 7sigma 10y ago
You don't necessarily need ORMs. If the developer had used prepared statements (e.g. PDO in php), then there would probably have been a lot less vulnerabilities.
132.
A good summary of the problems with the IARC classification on Glyphosate(youtube.com)
1 points by 7sigma 11y ago|0 comments
133.
by 7sigma 11y ago
I emailed Adrian Dubock (via the contact email on the website) and his reply was that the philippines will still be included. My guess is that when they started the philippines and other rice producint countries where on that list (couldn&#
134.
by 7sigma 11y ago
This is pure anti GMO propaganda. "it's covered by a thicket of patents from about 30 companies" The patents have been waived for humanitarian purposes. Also rice is self polinating so of little interest to seed companies. h
135.
by 7sigma 11y ago
some of the comments made me chuckle:
136.
by 7sigma 11y ago
2005 to 2007, but things might have changed since then. One of the "fond" memories was during our training where the guy basically said that when you compile your function (or app) the first time, you run the command and then get
137.
by 7sigma 11y ago
yep, lets not forget 700mb + executables...
138.
by 7sigma 11y ago
Former bloomberg employee here. While the bloomberg service usually runs very well, its built mostley on spaghetti code that has been copy pasta'ed since the 80s and 90s. It might have improved since I worked there, but there were some
139.
by 7sigma 12y ago
this article provides a good rebuttal to the IARC http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/03/20/march-mad... tl;dr: the IARC report bases its conclusion on the potential hazard rather than the
140.
by 7sigma 12y ago
I wonder what studies he's talking about. The ones I'm aware of that show these effects are seralini study, or judy carman's pig study. And anybody with even a basic knowledge of science should be able to tell that they are l